The opinion of the court was delivered by: VICTOR MARRERO, District Judge

DECISION AND ORDER

The Court previously granted, in very large part, the plaintiff's
summary judgment motion in this contract dispute. The plaintiff now seeks
to obtain the remaining relief it sought. Because the Court concludes
that the request is procedurally improper, the motion is denied.
Page 2

I. BACKGROUND

Siemens Westinghouse Power Corporation ("SWPC") and Dick corporation
("Dick") formed a consortium for the purpose of constructing a power
plant. The plant construction became severely delayed, and the plant
owners collected liquidated damages against the consortium by drawing
upon letters of credit SWPC had posted on the consortium's behalf. The
parties are now suing each other, in part, to determine how much each
party is responsible for those liquidated damages. In a summary judgment
Decision and Order dated October 14, 2003 ("October Order"), the Court
determined that, under the parties' Consortium Agreement, Dick, not SWPC,
was liable for the liquidated damages to the owners up front, and that
the ultimate apportionment of those damages would to be determined
according to other provisions of the Consortium Agreement. See
Siemens Westinghouse Power Corp. v. Dick Corp., 293 F. Supp.2d 336
(S.D.N.Y. 2003).*fn1 SWPC was seeking an order declaring Dick liable for
the about $18 million which it had paid to the owners, but, because the
Court could only account for about $15 million, the Court's October Order
found Dick
Page 3
liable for that lesser amount. Id. at 341. By letters
dated February 3, 12 and 19, 2004, SWPC now seeks the additional $3
million.

SPWC's complaint states that, in October 2002, the owners made separate
draws upon their letters of credit in the amounts of $5,434,732.80 and
$620,801.20, and that the "basis for these draws, in addition to the
liquidated damages assessments, was a lien filed by [a]
subcontractor . . . in the amount of $3,000,490.02." (Compl. ¶ 24)
As part of its original summary judgment motion, SWPC included a chart
listing draws in those precise amounts in October 2002 as part of the
$18 million in total damages it sought. Because the $3 million amount
appeared to pertain to the subcontractor's lien, the Court agreed with
Dick that SWPC had not carried its burden of showing that the money at
issue was properly attributable to liquidated damages.

SWPC now states that, although the owners withheld the $3 million
pertaining to the lien from the consortium payments, the owners never
actually drew that money from SWPC's letters of credit, and that the
owners' liquidated damages draws, in fact, totaled the original $18
million it sought. SWPC proposes to submit a short affidavit explaining
how the subcontractor's lien was a separate consideration from the
Page 4
liquidated damages calculations.*fn2 Dick considers SWPC's request
procedurally improper but, in the alternative, seeks to file an
opposition memorandum and affidavit contesting it on the merits.

II. DISCUSSION

As an initial matter, it is unclear whether SWPC's request is a
subsequent summary judgment motion, or a motion for reconsideration of
the October Order. The Court need not determine the more appropriate
label because, under either procedural vehicle, the motion must be
denied.

First, treating the motion as a subsequent summary judgment motion, the
Court concludes it procedurally improper. Although the Court certainly
has discretion to review a successive summary judgment motion seeking
precisely the same relief as before, see Wechsler v. Hunt Health
Sys., Ltd., 198 F. Supp.2d 508, 514 (S.D.N.Y. 2003) ("A party may
renew its motion for summary judgment as long as it is supported by new
material."), the Court declines to exercise that discretion here because
SWPC has not raised any new facts or arguments which it could not have
raised in the first round of briefing. The Court "do[es] not approve in
general the piecemeal consideration of successive motions for summary
judgment"
Page 5
because parties ought to be "held to the requirement that they
present their strongest case for summary judgment when the matter is
first raised." Allstate Finance Corp. v. Zimmerman,
296 F.2d 797, 799 (5th Cir. 1961). Moreover, the Court notes that this case is
apparently a long way from final disposition. Dick has made clear that it
will press its counterclaims which seek to offset its liability to SWPC,
and adjudicating those issues will require further briefing or a trial.
The Court considers it more economical to address the remaining issues in
this litigation all at once, rather than invite a round of briefing on
this narrow issue, especially because it appears to be contested on the
merits.

Second, treating the motion as one for reconsideration, the Court
concludes that the request, made over three and one-half months after
the October Order, is far too late. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)
provides that a motion for reconsideration of an order "shall be made in
a reasonable time," Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b), and this District's local
rules only permit a party ten days within which to serve a motion for
reconsideration. S.D.N.Y. Local R. 6.3.

III. ORDER

For the reasons stated, it is hereby

ORDERED that the request of plaintiff Siemens Westinghouse
Power Corporation ("SWPC") for leave to file a
Page 6
motion to amend the Court's judgment authorized by the Order dated
October 14, 2003, so as to declare Dick Corporation liable to SWPC in an
additional amount of $3,000,490.02 of liquidated damages, is denied,
without prejudice to renewal of the request in connection with the
resolution of issues and claims still outstanding in this action.

SO ORDERED.

Our website includes the main text of the court's opinion but does not include the
docket number, case citation or footnotes. Upon purchase, docket numbers and/or
citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a legal proceeding.
Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision.

Buy This Entire Record For
$7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.